A theoretical foundation to support the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and other related indexes

By Philip A. Lawn. 2003

436 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Environmental Engineering, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/82a4d6587db611e27b047df9a2c003f7d1f47d2c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Environmental Engineering

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Citations in the corpus

Measuring sustainable development: Some empirical evidence for France from eight alternative indicators (2008, background): “Yet, Lawn (2003) constructs a theoretical framework to support the ISEW/GPI based on the Fisherian concept of income.”
Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: concepts and measurement (2007, neutral): “An up-to-date review is provided in chapters 7 to 9 of Lawn (2006).”
Renewable Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development (2011, background): “Notably, indicators that extend GDP, such as the latter two, tend to deviate qualitatively from the GDP since the 1970s or 1980s, stagnating (or in case of the UK decreasing) in many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (Lawn, 2003).”
Measuring progress in the degrowth transition to a steady state economy (2012, methodology): “The ISEW and GPI are monetary indicators with a theoretical foundation based on Irving Fisher's definition of income and capital (Lawn, 2003a).”
An Assessment of the Valuation Methods Used to Calculate the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and Sustainable Net Benefit Index (SNBI) (2005, background): “A recent response to (a) demonstrates that the ISEW, GPI, and SNBI are entirely consistent with Fisher’s (1906) widely accepted concept of income and capital (Lawn, 2003).”
An interdisciplinary study on indicators: A comparative review of quality-of-life, macroeconomic, environmental, welfare and sustainability indicators (2013, methodology): “The above observation demonstrates the need for further elaboration of their theoretical framework, a need that has been stressed by many researchers (Bunge, 1975; Cobb and Rixford, 1998; Daly, 1996; Faber, 2008; Kroll, 2011; Lawn, 2003; Michalos, 1997; Neumayer, 1999; Reeves, 2009; Sirgy, 2011).”
Economic Growth Quality, Environmental Sustainability, and Social Welfare in China - Provincial Assessment Based on Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) (2019, background): “Asia-Pacific Australia, New Zealand, Japan, China, Thailand, India, Vietname 1967–2006 Lawn and Clarke (2010) Yes”
Beyond GDP: The Need for New Measures of Progress (2009, neutral): “A frequent criticism of alternative measures is the subjective nature of the decisions used to create the methodologies (England 1998; Neumayer 1999 Neumayer 2000; Lawn 2003; Lawn 2005).”
Beyond GDP: Classifying Alternative Measures for Progress (2011, background): “For instance, Lawn (2003) worked out a sound theoretical framework for the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) and several related measures based on the income concept of Fisher.”
Estimates of the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) for Vermont, Chittenden County and Burlington, from 1950 to 2000 (2004, background): “! There are several assumptions built into the GPI that are open to question (Neumayer, 2000; Lawn, 2003).”
Substitutability and weighting of ecological and economic indicators: Exploring the importance of various components of a synthetic index (2009, methodology): “Different problems emerge in these procedures including (i) the choice of relevant indicators, (ii) the methods used to transform/normalise the indicators themselves, and (iii) the weighting techniques (Dumanski et al., 1998; Lawn, 2003; Diodato and Ceccarelli, 2004).”
Multi-attributed environmental index construction (2006, background): “Lawn (2003) suggests the strongest criticisms of ISEW, and related measures such as GPI and SNBI, relates to the valuation of these items.”